Why TiE members are scared of blogs?

When you think of TiE, you think of people who live, breathe, and dream technology. However, there is one area of technology that has not caught the imagination of the TiE community: blogging. And here is why:

1. A survey early this year by TiE-Boston of its membership base to find out the number of bloggers elicited just three responses.
2. TiE Boston has never addressed the issue of blogging in any talk/speech/panel discussion - probably, one of the most remarkable technological developments during last two years.
3. The TiECON blog has been a disappointment on two metrics: number of links from TiE Boston members pointing to the blog and the number of comments left.

How to leverage blogs for personal and professional success?

There is enough information in the public domain about the value of a blog and I don't need to repeat that here. So here are some tips on how you can make blogging a part of your professional life:

1. If your boss/employer lives under a stone, or has never heard about blogs, or has never read/written one, and bans you from blogging, take the time to teach her/him the basics of blogs and how they are a great business tool. Cite examples of companies like Microsoft and Sun Microsystems that are very effectively using blogs for internal/external communication.
2. While you are encouraged to read your employer's HR policies, generally speaking, an employer has no control when you blog during your private time (though I consider blogging as a business activity if the blog's focus is related to your area of work) as long as you do not divulge company secrets in your blog. Thus, if you work for a semiconductor company, you can blog about semiconductors provided you do not share information that is not meant for public consumption.
3. If you would like to improve your writing skills, join a creative writings class. In the meantime, start a blog talking about your family or hobby or vacation. Great way to become familiar with the tools.
4. If you are cheap, open a blog at Blogger. Otherwise, get your own domain name and blog like a professional - I only spend five bucks a month for my blog.
5. And if you think bloggers are wasting their time, think again. Apart from the brand that I have built, I make a pretty respectable living.

So here is the challenge. Start your blog, come back here, and add a comment below pointing to your blog. Or even better, blog about this initiative on your blog. It will be nice to see a few more bloggers in the TiE community.

- By Jay Dwivedi, who not only blogs for himself but blogs for TiE too.

Is digital media convergence a meaningful concept?

Let me start off with a caveat. The discussion here will focus on next 6-12 months since I believe that with the pace of technological change in this space, to predict anything beyond that is merely entertaining ourselves with fantasies.

Convergence is a concept that has been pushed by technologists for years but consumers have largely rejected the concept. While there are numerous examples of how consumers prefer to consume their media to have the most enriching experience, let me just discuss one case study to illustrate the point that any discussion of convergence is more complex than it appears to be.

Camera phones

Camera phones started to become available on a big scale during the 2002-2003 period and by 2004, they took off - selling about a quarter billion units that year. I have not seen the final numbers for 2005 yet in the public domain, but the estimates range from 280 million to 300 million units. If you add it all up, some estimates indicate that there could be as many as one billion camera phones out there.

You would expect then that consumers must be going nuts taking pictures with their camera phones. On the contrary, if you take a look at Flickr, almost all photos are taken with a full-fledged digital camera. I think a phone camera does make sense when you are sipping a martini at "Pure" and Paris Hilton walks in. You quickly snap a few photos to post on your blog the same day or even blog by email almost immediately. However, when you want to build a good photo album online or to print your pictures, a digital camera is the only option.

And what consumers are indirectly saying is supported by Kodak research. The company found that nearly two-thirds of camera phone owners rarely, if ever, upload pictures to a computer. And 70 percent never (or rarely) send photos to other phones. In other words, consumers understand that mobile phones are best suited for having a phone conversation - not for taking pictures.

Where are we likely to see convergence?

Consumers are saying that they are willing to use some applications of convergence. For instance, most sane people do not watch "The Daily Show" on their computers, but if they miss an episode and there is particularly funny clip, they don't mind looking at only that clip (not the whole episode) on the web. I have seen people kill time playing games on their mobile phones while waiting in line at the RMV, but don't expect these game enthusiasts to abandon their PS2 or XBOX. There are numerous other instances of how convergence is happening on a limited scale.

What does it mean from an investment perspective?

Just because a bunch of technologists have come up with something they think is "cool," it doesn't mean that it is cool for an average consumer. Merely packing more features in a device may actually be counter-productive, making it bulkier, slower, less user-friendly, and expensive. So as you evaluate a potential new product and when you have listened to those entrepreneurs who think that their device will change the world (remember the refrigerators connected to the web - not many of them are sold each year), step outside the conference room and show it to a bunch of teenagers. You will get better data on the potential that way.

How to learn more?

If you are excited by technological developments in the world of media, entertainment, and technology, and want to find out where the business opportunities lie, I invite you attend a panel discussion on the topic of convergence at TiECON moderated by Josh Bernoff.

- By Jay Dwivedi

Biotech sector needs innovation, not government help

If Christopher R. Anderson, president of the Massachusetts High Technology Council, is really speaking on behalf of the state's biotech/pharma industry, it is disappointing to see that the industry is running away from innovation and wants to use regulation as a way to protect its turf.

In an opinion piece in Mass High Tech "Drug importation is bad policy and bad politics," his arguments sound so outdated in 2006. Here we are living in a world that seems to flatten each day, and apparently the Massachusetts biotech firms are arguing for more regulation, rather than for opening markets globally.

Anderson argues against free trade in drugs for the following reasons:

1. It harms the state economy. In the short run, it absolutely will (companies that resist change may go out of business, some people may lose jobs, etc.), but the solution is not protectionism. The right approach will be to develop a more powerful business model that takes into consideration the new reality - a flat world in which drugs will soon move as freely as apparel or electronics do.
2. It puts patients in harm's way. First of all, this issue is not yet settled. Both the FDA and the GAO have admitted that amount of data that they have collected on imported counterfeit drugs is extremely small. Since it is illegal to import, many crooks are currently in business. In other words, if it were made legal, legitimate companies will emerge and do what is needed, and checks and balances would be put in place to guarantee safety. The way we have systems in place to assure safety of pharmaceutical ingredients (that's right, we import a lot of fine chemicals that eventually end up in prescription drugs) from overseas, we can also have the same safety systems for drugs.
3. It harms the drug discovery pipeline. No, it doesn't. To say so is to resist change and to try to transform your business model. If the cost of development of a drug is high (~ $1 billion), and that is a good enough reason to argue for trade barriers, somehow reminds me of the steel industry. We are seeing that in many other sectors (IT, software, business services, auto, etc.), where the cost of business has been fairly high, companies have found ways to optimize their supply chains and lower their costs to stay competitive.

The only good news is that some pharma executives can see the future and are already redesigning their business processes using some very innovative approaches. If you are a biotech executive and see the current business environment as an opportunity (rather than a threat) to transform your business, I invite you to attend sessions on "Cross-Border Models of Life Sciences: A View Across the Value Chain" and "Global Sourcing in a Flat World" during TiECon East 2006.

Recommended article: How to innovate in a flat world?

- By Jay Dwivedi

How to innovate in a flat world?

Many business people that I have met have this wrong idea that innovation is something that techies need to worry about - something that needs to be discussed in the R&D group meeting rather than the boardroom. The concept of innovation is so powerful that it can be applied to each and every aspect of doing business - in other words, to the business model itself. And as we contemplate the theme of TiECON, here is an excellent case study of how we can all take advantage of flattening world to drive our costs down and enhance the customer experience.

According to a story in the New York Times, "The Long-Distance Journey of a Fast-Food Order," Matt Richtel reports that when you drive up to some McDonald's locations, do not assume that the person you speak to to place your order is working inside the restaurant (old model). On the contrary, that person is a customer-service rep at a call center (in California). The order is transmitted to the restaurant almost immediately and is prepared for you during the time it will take you to drive to the pickup window.

How does McDonald's create value?

1. It lowers the cost of doing business. Employees who traditionally answer the phone can be eliminated or asked to do prepare the order in a shorter time.
2. The company can train a small group of reps to treat customers more consistently. For fast food restaurants it is a nightmare to train teenagers and employees (most of whom do not speak English as their first language) to be courteous and efficient.

Will the call center move overseas?

You bet. Since this is only a trial, I expect that eventually your order may be taken by call center employee in a less expensive location.

What a great way to make optimum use of resources scattered globally!

- Posted by Jay Dwivedi

Opportunities for exporting to India

A big deal is being made by Indian politicians about the jump in their exports to 100 billion dollars (I think they are still measly compared to China at over $700 billions), but that is not what was interesting to me. I was actually more curious about what India was importing. Like us, India is also importing more than it exports. Of course, oil and petrochemicals have a role to play, but if I exclude those products, the market for foreign products in India is just shy of 100 billion dollars.

And what are Indians importing?

I found the list to be somewhat interesting. There were things that I did not expect. Here are the top five categories:

1. Natural or cultured pearls, precious or semiprecious stones, precious metals, jewelry, coins, etc. 18%
2. Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and mechanical appliances, etc. 8.5%
3. Electrical machinery and equipment and parts thereof; sound recorders and reproducers, television image and sound recorders and reproducers, and parts 7%
4. Iron and steel 4%
5. Organic chemicals 3.5%

- By Jay Dwivedi

How to improve infrastructure in India?

While I have been advocating investment in India, but one of the things that frustrates me as that when I try to dig opportunities there, the sad state of infrastructure in the country is a serious risk. The moment you land there, you realize that India has a long way to go. And I am not even talking about other things that make doing business in India so difficult - widespread corruption and clueless bureaucrats.

I do not intend to use this post to whine about inadequate infrastructure in India or the nuisances of doing business there. On the contrary, let me point out how you can make a difference this year at TiECon.

As I had mentioned in a previous post, I am particularly delighted to know that we have a few folks attending who can actually do something about the infrastructure. That's right; we have several members of Indian parliament who will be attending.

While each one of you may have your own wish list and you are welcome to discuss it with them, but here are two broad guidelines on what you must definitely try to highlight:

1. No infrastructure, no investment: Unless the state of infrastructure improves, you will NOT consider making major investments. Like any risk management analysis will point out, a country that cannot provide reliable sources of power, transportation network, and telecom is low on the attractiveness ladder. It is not that we are playing hardball - it is just the way we have to manage our investment risk.
2. Deregulation and privatization to encourage investment in infrastructure: When investors allocate capital for infrastructure that should have been provided by someone else (not necessarily the Government) at a much lower cost, nobody wins. In other words, when companies set up their own mini power plants at their facilities, everybody loses. Therefore, the lead on this has to come from the policymakers in form of deregulation and privatization.

UBS did a report in which it found that ROCE in India during the 1998-2003 period was 17% versus 11% in China (the actual number may actually be much lower due to subsidized capital in China), and the productivity/competitiveness in India is far higher than that in China, but it still lags China in attracting investors. We should tell policymakers the reasons.

- By Jay Dwivedi

Photo courtesy: Tom Maisey (Used under creative commons license)